"1989 Bill Gates Talk on Microsoft" @ csclub.uwaterloo.ca
"Bill Gates discusses the software and computer industry, and how Microsoft has contributed. Gates also discusses his views on the future of the computing industry. The talk was recorded in 1989 but was only recently digitized."

"CyberInsecurity: The Cost of Monopoly" .PDF
"The report, prepared by Dr. Dan geer and six other distinguished computer-security researchers, laid bare what many have known for years: That the presence of a single, ubiquitous operating system, no matter who produces it, is inherently dangerous to networked computers"

"MICROSOFT can, and will, violate this proposed Final Judgment"
"MICROSOFT has consistently violated United States Antitrust Law. MICROSOFT has illegally tied licenses of its operating systems to OEMs' sales of processors in computers" "MICROSOFT has continually engaged in "vaporware" to kill competing products" "Since MICROSOFT can drag out any enforcement action that the DOJ brings against MICROSOFT for violating this proposed Final Judgment, MICROSOFT can, and will, violate this proposed Final Judgment."

"Microsoft promises Vista security" @ news.bbc.co.uk 10/2006
Rather than promises, Microsoft, why not just release the source code for everyone to see so we may audit it ourselves? When it comes to security, I don't believe the word of another, especially when it comes to corporations, I believe what my own eyes can see, and if I can't see the source code then I won't use it! All operating systems and software, especially any software claiming to have any degree of security, should be free and open source so the users may audit, inspect, and modify it themselves!

"Microsoft's backroom deals"
"the OEMs have established a distribution channel that initially defines and then attempts to control what software the majority of consumers run on their computers. For us to correct this problem, we need to stop wondering about Microsoft's backroom deals and such and start focusing on the OEMs themselves. We need to show the FTC and other parties of interest that the average consumer is not presented with a choice when purchasing a personal computer. We need to stop settling for the occasional bone thrown at us when an HP or Dell preinstalls GNU/Linux on a fraction of its products and then buries the option 50 links deep on the product's site. This is not the "choice" I am speaking of and that I envision in order to establish a level playing field."

"deals enabled Microsoft to maintain its dominance"
"Over the course of the day, Boies laid out a comprehensive picture of what he alleged to be Microsoft's attempts to bully its allies, competitors, and business partners — including OEMs , ISPs, ISVs and others — into making deals. He said those deals enabled Microsoft to maintain its dominance in the operating system market and to parlay that dominance into a dominant position in the Internet browser market."

"make Microsoft finally take notice"
"It is going to take a major Linux vendor pairing up with a major first-tier OEM and a major enterprise or government to make the inroads on the desktop which will make Microsoft finally take notice."

Class Action Notice @ iowasoftwaresuit.com
"Legal Notice to Iowa Consumers and Businesses" "If you purchased certain Microsoft software, or a computer on which it was installed, a class action lawsuit may affect your rights"

Good user comment on Slashdot, quoted in whole:
"No, you're wrong. Microsoft's "evil", insofar as I'm concerned, has to do with the companies and technologies that never had a chance because someone at Microsoft decided to steal it, buy it or just destroy it. That someone was often William H. Gates. The Personal Computer Revolution was largely stolen from us, because we all got forced to go the Redmond way. There's no point in going over Microsoft's other evils, such as the fact that it is a Grade-A government-certified illegally acquired-and-maintained monopoly. Now, monopolies aren't necessarily evil or illegal … but Microsoft's is, on both counts. And don't try to excuse them as just being, you know, basically decent people who make honest mistakes. Microsoft is a criminal organization that has maintained a consistent pattern of unlawful activity throughout its entire corporate existence. And so far as Apple and Google are concerned, it sounds like you're excusing Microsoft's bad behavior because well, you know, Apple and Google might be as bad, but we don't know yet so let's give Microsoft a pass for now. Look nobody knows whether we are alone in the Universe … but the question of whether that company is good or evil has been answered. They were taken to court over the issue of their monopoly status and lost. So yeah, Microsoft is evil, and the pattern of general nastiness persists to this very day. Why do you think the European Union is giving them such a hard time? Have you been following the OOXML fiasco, with Microsoft attempting to buy their way into a standard? No, I suggest you keep Googling Microsoft: it's obvious you've not been around long enough to have experienced their evil firsthand. I've been in the software business since before Microsoft was a gleam in Bill Gates' eye, and I've seen the damage he and his brainchild have caused. Bill can give all his money to charity if he wants, but there's no Undo button for what he's done."

Open Letter to Hobbyists @ Wikipedia
"The Open Letter to Hobbyists was an open letter written by Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft, to early personal computer hobbyists, in which Gates expresses dismay at the rampant copyright infringement taking place in the hobbyist community, particularly with regard to his company's software."